"Jewish Survivalism" As Communal Ideology: an Empirical Assessment Jonathan S

WOOCHER "Jewish Survivalism" as Communal Ideology: An Empirical Assessment Jonathan S. Woocher Hornstein Program in Jewish Communal Service, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts The ideology of "Jewish survivalism" does lead the Jewish community to "turn inward." That turning inward need not, however, be an exercise either in self-centeredness or narcissism if the full dimensions of the challenges of survival in the contemporary world are understood and embraced. In recent years, observers of American appears, indeed, to be the reigning ideology Jewish communal life have noted with in Jewish communal life, the frame of increasing frequency what some have values, perceptions, emotions, and norma called a "turning inward " on the part of the tive prescriptions within which the com community and its leadership.1 This munal enterprise is conducted and legiti "inward turn" has found expression in a mated. Within this frame, Jewish survival greater attentiveness on the part of com is defined as the community's raison d'etre, munal organizations and agencies specifi and those activities and institutions which cally to Jewish needs and concerns, and in a can most forcefully and directly assert a diminution in communal activism in the claim to be promoting Jewish survival are areas of non-sectarian services and pro placed at the forefront of the Jewish com gramming and promotion of general civic munal agenda.2 welfare. The rationale for this reorienta The ascendancy of "Jewish survivalism" tion has been provided by a heightened as the operative ideology of Jewish organi concern for "Jewish survival"in the face of zational life has been hailed as the begin the demonstrably corrosive effects of as ning of a new era in American Jewish life, similation on Jewish identity and com but it has also not been without its critics. munal affiliation in the United States and Before attempting to assess the merits of the persistent threats to Jewish com "survivalism" as an ideology, however, it munities in other parts of the world. might be useful to address some empirical Unquestionably, the historical experience questions about its scope and actual of the Jewish people in the 20th century— implications for communal functioning the Holocaust and the apparently un and Jewish self-definition. Assuming that ending and even increasing isolation of "Jewish survivalism" has become the Israel in the world community—has con ideology of American Jewish leadership, ditioned American Jews to see Jewish how is it expressed concretely in that survival as perpetually endangered, and leadership's perceptions of communal prob has also provided the core vocabulary for lems, its priorities for the allocation of any analysis of the Jewish condition. What communal resources and energies, and its might be called "Jewish survivalism" definitions of what it means to be a Jew on a personal behavioral level? Does "sur 1 See, e.g., Earl Rabb, "The End of Jewish vivalism" have clear and constant implica- Community Relations?" Journal of Jewish Com munal Service, Vol. 54 (Winter 1977), pp 107-15; Gerald B. Bubis, "Confronting Some Issues in Jewish 2 Cf. Daniel Elazar, Community and Polity: The Continuity: The Response of the Profession,'Vouma/ Organizational Dynamics of American Jewry. of Jewish Communal Service, Vol. 55 (Sept. 1978), Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of pp. 10-22. America, 1976, pp. 287ff. 291 JOURNAL OF JEWISH COMMUNAL SERVICE tions in these areas which will enable us to of a "good Jew." speak not only in broad terms of a "turning The basic commitment of these young inward," but to define the specific patterns leaders to Jewish survival and continuity is of concern likely to shape the communal vigorous and virtually unanimous. More agenda and of Jewish identity likely to be than 96 percent strongly agree that it is reflected among community leaders? important that there always be a Jewish The empirical data which I wish to use in people (fewer than 1 percent disagree).4 90 examining the dimensions and implica percent of the young leaders also assert that tions of "Jewish survivalism" as the opera without Jewish religion the Jewish people tive ideology of contemporary communal could not survive. We can, therefore, anti leaders are drawn from a survey of approxi cipate that the survival agenda of these mately 230 participants in leadership young leaders will reflect in some way a development programs sponsored by local concern for cultural and spiritual as well as Jewish Federations or by the Council of physical continuity (though to what extent Jewish Federations and United Jewish and how, are questions of interest). At the Appeal.3 Although few in this group same time, the commitment to Jewish (median age = mid-thirties) could be survival among the respondents is accom regarded as communal leaders of influence panied by a widely shared perception that today, they constitute an important focus such survival is threatened today. Nearly of study for two reasons, 1) the likelihood 85 percent of the young leaders surveyed that a substantial number will be important believe that the world is still not ready to let community (if not national) leaders in the Jews live in peace, and a similar percentage future, and 2) the fact that they have been regard assimilation as the greatest current selected and formally socialized by the threat to Jewish survival. How strongly established communal system, thereby their commitment to survival and this providing insight into its translation of the perception of its endangerment from with "survivalist" ideology into specific values out and within affects the outlook of these and norms. The respondents in the survey leaders on Jewish problems, priorities, and do not constitute a scientific sample of the norms can be seen by looking at their total population of young Jewish leaders responses in these areas in greater detail. but they do appear to be broadly repre sentative demographically and sociologi Problems Facing the Jewish Community cally of the moderately to very active As part of the survey, the respondents segment of that population. The instru were given a list of eighteen suggested ment used in the survey was a closed-ended problems facing the American Jewish questionnaire filled out by the participants community, and were asked to rate each as covering a number of aspects of Jewish "very serious," "moderately serious," "a background, attitudes, and behavior. In cluded in the questionnaire were three 4 By way of comparison, 70.2 percent of the sections dealing specifically with percep respondents in the National Jewish Population tions of communal problems, priorities for Study, the survey of a representative sample of all communal activity, and characterizations American Jews conducted in 1970, strongly agreed with a virtually identical statement; approximately 11 percent of that sample expressed either disagreement 3 Further discussion about the survey, its admin with the statement or were not sure of their attitude. istration, the groups polled, and additional results can Fred Massarik, Jewish Identity: Facts for Planning. be found in my article "Emerging Leadership in the New York: Council of Jewish Fedrations, 1974, p. 18. American Jewish Community," in the American Whether these figures would be different for a Jewish Year Book, Vol. 81. New York: American comparable sample a decade later is, of course, a Jewish Committee, forthcoming. matter for speculation. 292 WOOCHER problem, but not a particularly serious (in percentages of the total number re one," or "not a problem" (a box for "don't sponding), ranked from that regarded col know" was also provided). Table 1 shows lectively as "most serious" to "least the ratings given for each of the problems serious." TABLE 1 — VS = very serious problem SERIOUSNESS OF PROBLEMS MS = moderately serious problem FACING THE AMERICAN N = not a problem JEWISH COMMUNITY U = uncertain P = a problem, but not a particularly serious one Percent Rating the Percent Rating the Rank* Problem Problem as Rank* Problem Problem as VS MS P N U VS MS P N U 1. the conflict between 11. decline in the im Israel and its portance of religious neighbors 97 3 institutions in American 2. the treatment of Jews Jewish life 29 38 24 4 4 in the Soviet Union 88 12 12. declining levels of 3. high rate of inter religious observance marriage 72 21 4 2 2 by Jews 24 44 26 5 1 4. alienation of youth from Jewish life 72 18 7 2 1 13. inadequate services 5. anti-Semitism in for the Jewish elderly 20 30 29 11 9 the U.S. 54 32 12 1 14. insufficient Jewish content in programs 6. low levels of parti sponsored by Jewish cipation in Jewish organizations 19 33 19 21 8 communal activities 53 32 12 1 1 7. low Jewish birth-rate 43 27 22 6 2 15. inadequate rabbis 21 22 23 22 12 8. assimilation of Jews 16. lack of unity among to American life Jewish religious styles and values 39 29 21 10 1 denominations 17 26 31 20 6 9. low levels of Jewish knowledge among lay 17. discrimination leaders of the against women in Jewish life 11 24 34 24 6 Jewish community 34 34 30 9 3 18. lack of democracy in 10. inadequate Jewish schools 35 23 17 15 9 Jewish communal life II 12 28 32 16 •Rank was determined by assigning point values to :h of the responses (VS - 3, MS = 2, P = 1, N and U = 0) and totalling the points for each problem. The prol m with the highest number of total points is ranked #1 and so on. Several features of the responses stand problems the Arab-Israeli conflict and the out. The most notable of these is the treatment of Soviet Jews indicates that consistently serious rating given to those their commitment to Jewish survival is problems which do relate most immedi global and attuned to what appear to be the ately and directly to the survival of Jews most imminent threats to Jewish security and Jewry.

Load more